UK: Lifesciences Snapshot: Autumn 2007


End to Trade Mark Examination on Relative Grounds

From the 1 October 2007, the UK Intellectual Property Office will no longer examine trade mark applications on relative grounds. The onus will be on proprietors of potentially conflicting marks to object to the mark.

For our full Law-Now on this change, click here.

ECJ Rules That National Courts are Free to Decide Whether or Not to Apply TRIPs

The Portuguese Supremo Tribunal de Justica, in Merck Genéricos - Produtos Farmacêuticos Ldª v Merck & Co. Inc. and Merck Sharp & Dohme Ld, referred two questions to the European Court of Justice. The first question being ‘Does the [ECJ] have jurisdiction to interpret Article 33 of the TRIPs Agreement?’ and the second being if the ECJ did have jurisdiction, ‘must national courts apply that article, on their own initiative or at the request of one of the parties, in proceedings pending before them?’

The ECJ declared that it did have jurisdiction to interpret the provisions of the TRIPs agreement and went on to rule that as Community legislation now stands with regards to patents, it is not contrary to Community law for Article 33 of TRIPs to be directly applied by a national court subject to any conditions provided for by national law.

For our full Law-Now on this case, click here.

Comparative Advertising and Trade Mark Infringement

Two recent cases, both of which were cases in which trade mark infringement was alleged, involved applications for interim injunctions to prevent publication of comparative advertising. The outcome of both cases highlighted that advertising, as a form of expression, is protected by the Human Rights Act 1994 and as result both of these cases will make it considerably more difficult to obtain interim injunctions in future comparative advertising cases.

For our full Law-Now on the impact of these cases, click here.

Les Laboratoires Servier and Others v Apotex Inc

The High Court held that a patent for manufacturing a single crystalline form of a known pharmaceutical, which could take three possible crystalline forms, is invalid. The original patent for manufacture of the pharmaceutical showed that this process would inevitably produce the claimed crystalline form. In arriving at his decision, Pumfrey J held that although claims had to be construed at their priority date, it was irrelevant that at the date of the original patent it was not known that the pharmaceutical could have more than one form. The original patent anticipated the patent in suit, which also was obvious in the light of the original patent.

For the full judgment in this case, click here.


Eisai Ltd v National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence

In the first ever judicial review of NICE, Eisai Limited challenging the decision of the NICE Appeal Panel and the consequent guidance issued by NICE in relation to a particular class of Alzheimer’s medicines, which the guidance stated should not be made available to mild Alzheimer’s sufferers. The High Court decided that the consultation procedure employed by NICE (including the disclosure of only a "read only" version of the economic model used by NICE) did not deny Eisai access to significant information or the opportunity to make an intelligent response. The court decided that NICE were under no obligation to allow consultees to quality assure the model and that there was no substantive legal right for consultees to see every document. The Court rejected all four grounds on which Eisai claimed there had been errors of reasoning which robbed both the guidance and the decision of the NICE Appeal Panel of logic. The Court declined to open up the underlying experts’ debate about the clinical and cost-effectiveness of this class of Alzheimer’s disease medicines by deciding which experts were to be preferred. However, the Court did decide that the NICE guidance was unlawful in that its treatment of certain non-typical patient groups and discriminated against them in breach of anti-discrimination legislation. In consequence, NICE has had to revise its guidance to ensure that this no longer discriminates against those non-typical groups of patients.

Eisai has now applied to the Court of Appeal for permission to appeal the High Court decision on the point of NICE’s refusal to disclose a fully executable version of the economic model.

For the full judgment in this case, click here.

Following the outcome of this case, Shuna Mason and Tony Marks held a briefing seminar at CMS Cameron McKenna’s London office, in which the decision was reviewed and the overall judicial review process examined.

For a copy of the seminar pack that accompanied this briefing please contact Shuna Mason or click here.

HFEA Approve Hybrid Embryo Creation in Principle

The HFEA’s long awaited decision into the creation of human-animal embryos was released in September, with the Authority deciding that such research did fall within their licensing remit. It had been argued that the creation of hybrid embryos was necessary in order to provide the number of embryos required for the creation of human stem cell lines. Previously researchers have had to rely on surplus human embryos left over from fertility treatment, with such supply being limited in quantity and quality.

The Authority were keen to stress that they were not "green-lighting" hybrid embryos and that each application would be decided on a merit basis with applications likely to be approved if researchers can show, to the satisfaction of the Authority’s Licensing Committee, that the project is necessary and desirable and that it meets the Authority’s standards for embryo research.

The decision has paved the way for previous licence applications made by Kings College London and the University of Newcastle to be considered. Both of these applications were made earlier in the year but were put on hold whilst the Authority completed a public consultation into the issue. The Authority has indicted that it hopes to reach a decision on both of these applications in November and it is expected that both centres will be granted licences.

It still remains to be seen what impact, if any, the Authority’s decision will have on the ongoing review by the Government on the laws on embryo research and assisted reproduction. A move way from the Government’s original plans to ban hybrid embryos has already been seen in the draft Human Tissue and Embryos Bill.


GlaxoSmithKline UK Ltd v Department of Health [2007] EWHC 1470 (Comm) Queen’s Bench Division (Commercial Court)

GlaxoSmithKline ("GSK") has succeeded in an appeal against a decision of a panel appointed under the Pharmaceutical Price Regulation Scheme ("PPRS") on whether branded medicines reimbursed as generics should be included when calculating the overall price reductions given by a particular pharmaceutical company. The Court determined that, under the terms of the PPRS, this practice was not prohibited and that sales of branded products sold to fulfill generic prescriptions could be included in the price reduction calculations. The Court also found that the PPRS was a binding contract.

For our full Law-Now on this case, click here.


MHRA Successful in Medicines Counterfeit Case

A MHRA investigation in to counterfeit Cialis, Propecia and Viagra has successfully resulted in four men being convicted of offences under the Trade Marks Act 1994 and the Medicines Act 1968. The investigation began back in 2002 when HM Revenue & Customs seized counterfeit drugs at Heathrow and Stanstead airports.

The counterfeits were marketed through licensed wholesalers and Internet sales sites and in some cases the drugs made their way to pharmacies. Counterfeit Cialis was found in the supply chain as far up as patient level, a result of which was a recall of the drug from the UK market in 2004.

The MHRA investigation found that those convicted were part of a larger counterfeiting ring that operated from China, India and Pakistan and that extended as far as the USA. It is believed that during the three year period between 2002 and 2005, over £1,500,000 worth of counterfeit drugs were seized.

R v Wendyfair Markets (St Albans County Court)

In a criminal trail before St Albans County Court, Wendy Fair Markets Ltd ("the Company"), which runs Bovingdon Market, and two of its directors were found guilty of money laundering as a result of counterfeit goods being sold by stallholders. Evidence produced at the trial estimated that 20% of the stalls were selling counterfeit goods, which included CDs, DVDs and computer software. The Company and its directors, who received money in the form of pitch rentals, were found to have ‘turned a blind eye’ to the infringement of intellectual property rights.


Akzo Nobel Chemicals Ltd and Another v Commission of the European Communities (Court of First Instance of the EC)

The Court of First Instance of the EC has maintained the European Court of Justice’s restrictive approach to legal professional privilege by confirming that legal professional privilege does not apply to in-house lawyers in relation to European Commission investigations under EC competition rules.

For our full Law-Now on this case, click here.

Patent Ambush May be Anti-Competitive

The European Commission in a Statement of Objections has outlined its preliminary view that Rambus has infringed Article 82 of the EC Treaty (abuse of a dominant position). The alleged infringement stems from the unreasonable level of royalties being charged by Rambus for use of the relevant technology, which in this case was high bandwidth chip connection technologies, which resulted from the patent ambush (a ‘patent ambush’ occurs when, during a standard-setting process, an intellectual property owner fails to disclose its ownership of intellectual property which then subsequently forms part of the new agreed standard.)

This is the first time the Commission has characterised a patent ambush as an abuse of a dominant position.

For our full Law-Now on this important case, click here.


Nichia Corporation v Argos Ltd (Court of Appeal)

The majority of the Court of Appeal allowed an appeal against the High Court’s decision to refuse an application for disclosure of an inventor’s records. The majority judges refused to endorse a prima facie rule preventing such disclosure being ordered as they thought it would be unjust. They considered that rather than adopting a blanket rule of non-disclosure of inventor’s records, in the interests of proportionality, disclosure should be tailored depending on the likely value and significance of the evidence to be disclosed. The case highlights the increasing costs of patent litigation.

For our full Law-Now on this case, click here.


Employee Share Incentives in Recent Biotech IPOs

CMS Cameron McKenna has recently surveyed employee share plan arrangements as disclosed in company admission documents and prospectuses for biotech companies.

For our full Law-Now on the outcomes of this survey, click here.

This article was written for Law-Now, CMS Cameron McKenna's free online information service. To register for Law-Now, please go to

Law-Now information is for general purposes and guidance only. The information and opinions expressed in all Law-Now articles are not necessarily comprehensive and do not purport to give professional or legal advice. All Law-Now information relates to circumstances prevailing at the date of its original publication and may not have been updated to reflect subsequent developments.

The original publication date for this article was 16/10/2007.

To print this article, all you need is to be registered on

Click to Login as an existing user or Register so you can print this article.

In association with
Related Video
Up-coming Events Search
Font Size:
Mondaq on Twitter
Register for Access and our Free Biweekly Alert for
This service is completely free. Access 250,000 archived articles from 100+ countries and get a personalised email twice a week covering developments (and yes, our lawyers like to think you’ve read our Disclaimer).
Email Address
Company Name
Confirm Password
Mondaq Topics -- Select your Interests
 Law Performance
 Law Practice
 Media & IT
 Real Estate
 Wealth Mgt
Asia Pacific
European Union
Latin America
Middle East
United States
Worldwide Updates
Check to state you have read and
agree to our Terms and Conditions

Terms & Conditions and Privacy Statement (the Website) is owned and managed by Mondaq Ltd and as a user you are granted a non-exclusive, revocable license to access the Website under its terms and conditions of use. Your use of the Website constitutes your agreement to the following terms and conditions of use. Mondaq Ltd may terminate your use of the Website if you are in breach of these terms and conditions or if Mondaq Ltd decides to terminate your license of use for whatever reason.

Use of

You may use the Website but are required to register as a user if you wish to read the full text of the content and articles available (the Content). You may not modify, publish, transmit, transfer or sell, reproduce, create derivative works from, distribute, perform, link, display, or in any way exploit any of the Content, in whole or in part, except as expressly permitted in these terms & conditions or with the prior written consent of Mondaq Ltd. You may not use electronic or other means to extract details or information about’s content, users or contributors in order to offer them any services or products which compete directly or indirectly with Mondaq Ltd’s services and products.


Mondaq Ltd and/or its respective suppliers make no representations about the suitability of the information contained in the documents and related graphics published on this server for any purpose. All such documents and related graphics are provided "as is" without warranty of any kind. Mondaq Ltd and/or its respective suppliers hereby disclaim all warranties and conditions with regard to this information, including all implied warranties and conditions of merchantability, fitness for a particular purpose, title and non-infringement. In no event shall Mondaq Ltd and/or its respective suppliers be liable for any special, indirect or consequential damages or any damages whatsoever resulting from loss of use, data or profits, whether in an action of contract, negligence or other tortious action, arising out of or in connection with the use or performance of information available from this server.

The documents and related graphics published on this server could include technical inaccuracies or typographical errors. Changes are periodically added to the information herein. Mondaq Ltd and/or its respective suppliers may make improvements and/or changes in the product(s) and/or the program(s) described herein at any time.


Mondaq Ltd requires you to register and provide information that personally identifies you, including what sort of information you are interested in, for three primary purposes:

  • To allow you to personalize the Mondaq websites you are visiting.
  • To enable features such as password reminder, newsletter alerts, email a colleague, and linking from Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) to your website.
  • To produce demographic feedback for our information providers who provide information free for your use.

Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) do not sell or provide your details to third parties other than information providers. The reason we provide our information providers with this information is so that they can measure the response their articles are receiving and provide you with information about their products and services.

If you do not want us to provide your name and email address you may opt out by clicking here .

If you do not wish to receive any future announcements of products and services offered by Mondaq by clicking here .

Information Collection and Use

We require site users to register with Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) to view the free information on the site. We also collect information from our users at several different points on the websites: this is so that we can customise the sites according to individual usage, provide 'session-aware' functionality, and ensure that content is acquired and developed appropriately. This gives us an overall picture of our user profiles, which in turn shows to our Editorial Contributors the type of person they are reaching by posting articles on Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) – meaning more free content for registered users.

We are only able to provide the material on the Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) site free to site visitors because we can pass on information about the pages that users are viewing and the personal information users provide to us (e.g. email addresses) to reputable contributing firms such as law firms who author those pages. We do not sell or rent information to anyone else other than the authors of those pages, who may change from time to time. Should you wish us not to disclose your details to any of these parties, please tick the box above or tick the box marked "Opt out of Registration Information Disclosure" on the Your Profile page. We and our author organisations may only contact you via email or other means if you allow us to do so. Users can opt out of contact when they register on the site, or send an email to with “no disclosure” in the subject heading

Mondaq News Alerts

In order to receive Mondaq News Alerts, users have to complete a separate registration form. This is a personalised service where users choose regions and topics of interest and we send it only to those users who have requested it. Users can stop receiving these Alerts by going to the Mondaq News Alerts page and deselecting all interest areas. In the same way users can amend their personal preferences to add or remove subject areas.


A cookie is a small text file written to a user’s hard drive that contains an identifying user number. The cookies do not contain any personal information about users. We use the cookie so users do not have to log in every time they use the service and the cookie will automatically expire if you do not visit the Mondaq website (or its affiliate sites) for 12 months. We also use the cookie to personalise a user's experience of the site (for example to show information specific to a user's region). As the Mondaq sites are fully personalised and cookies are essential to its core technology the site will function unpredictably with browsers that do not support cookies - or where cookies are disabled (in these circumstances we advise you to attempt to locate the information you require elsewhere on the web). However if you are concerned about the presence of a Mondaq cookie on your machine you can also choose to expire the cookie immediately (remove it) by selecting the 'Log Off' menu option as the last thing you do when you use the site.

Some of our business partners may use cookies on our site (for example, advertisers). However, we have no access to or control over these cookies and we are not aware of any at present that do so.

Log Files

We use IP addresses to analyse trends, administer the site, track movement, and gather broad demographic information for aggregate use. IP addresses are not linked to personally identifiable information.


This web site contains links to other sites. Please be aware that Mondaq (or its affiliate sites) are not responsible for the privacy practices of such other sites. We encourage our users to be aware when they leave our site and to read the privacy statements of these third party sites. This privacy statement applies solely to information collected by this Web site.

Surveys & Contests

From time-to-time our site requests information from users via surveys or contests. Participation in these surveys or contests is completely voluntary and the user therefore has a choice whether or not to disclose any information requested. Information requested may include contact information (such as name and delivery address), and demographic information (such as postcode, age level). Contact information will be used to notify the winners and award prizes. Survey information will be used for purposes of monitoring or improving the functionality of the site.


If a user elects to use our referral service for informing a friend about our site, we ask them for the friend’s name and email address. Mondaq stores this information and may contact the friend to invite them to register with Mondaq, but they will not be contacted more than once. The friend may contact Mondaq to request the removal of this information from our database.


This website takes every reasonable precaution to protect our users’ information. When users submit sensitive information via the website, your information is protected using firewalls and other security technology. If you have any questions about the security at our website, you can send an email to

Correcting/Updating Personal Information

If a user’s personally identifiable information changes (such as postcode), or if a user no longer desires our service, we will endeavour to provide a way to correct, update or remove that user’s personal data provided to us. This can usually be done at the “Your Profile” page or by sending an email to

Notification of Changes

If we decide to change our Terms & Conditions or Privacy Policy, we will post those changes on our site so our users are always aware of what information we collect, how we use it, and under what circumstances, if any, we disclose it. If at any point we decide to use personally identifiable information in a manner different from that stated at the time it was collected, we will notify users by way of an email. Users will have a choice as to whether or not we use their information in this different manner. We will use information in accordance with the privacy policy under which the information was collected.

How to contact Mondaq

You can contact us with comments or queries at

If for some reason you believe Mondaq Ltd. has not adhered to these principles, please notify us by e-mail at and we will use commercially reasonable efforts to determine and correct the problem promptly.